Liverpool asked to explain show of support for Michael Shields

Liverpool asked to explain show of support for Michael Shields before West Ham match
                        

Liverpool will be asked to explain orchestrated show of support for Michael   Shields ahead of their televised Premier League match with West Ham.
                        

Link

Full article

Liverpool will be asked to explain the public and orchestrated show of support for one of the club’s fans, Michael Shields, who was convicted of the attempted murder of a Bulgarian waiter, ahead of their televised Premier League match with West Ham.

The Football Association will write to Liverpool seeking an explanation of events which saw players wearing T-shirts before the game bearing the words ‘free Michael now’, a phrase that was also displayed as a mosaic in the Kop.

Shields was sentenced to 10 years in prison for the attempted murder of waiter Martin Georgiev in 2005 and has since had two appeals through the Bulgarian court dismissed as well as an appeal to the European Court of Human Rights rejected.

A Bulgarian court ruled, after Georgiev identified Shields, that the Liverpool man had used a concrete slab to attack the waiter when a small group of supporters were involved in a disturbance in a Black Sea resort.

The subject has been given further resonance by the public outrage over the goal celebration enacted by Ipswich midfielder David Norris and subsequent FA disciplinary charge.

Norris mimicked being handcuffed in support of his friend, the former Plymouth Argyle goalkeeper Luke McCormick, who had recently been sentenced to seven years in prison for causing death by dangerous driving of two young brothers.

Norris was fined £5,000 and made a public apology, the money being donated to charity.

Shield’s case will go before a High Court review on Thursday and the FA’s main concern will be that the club used a televised match to try and have an influence on the issue.

Former Brookside actress Sue Johnston came on to the Anfield pitch with Shield’s parents and made a passionate speech in which she implored justice secretary Jack Straw to do “the right thing”. An article claiming Shield’s innocence also appeared in the club programme.

Liverpool appear not to have informed the authorities of their plans to make the public show of support and the FA is likely to look unfavourably on the club’s attempts to play politics on such an emotive issue, with an FA source telling the Guardian newspaper: “We are not comfortable about this.”

In 1997 striker Robbie Fowler was fined 2,000 Swiss francs by Uefa after expressing his support for Liverpool’s sacked dock workers on a T-shirt worn under his kit which he revealed during a European tie.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Message to the FA go F**k yourselves

A good article Venison , to bloody right he should be set free .  And a nice message to the FA.

Really makes my blood boil, they only ever tell half the story in the first place no mention that the Lad is innocent, what has it got to do with them what the club does before a game, Both Robbie's and David Norris protests took part during the game so how is that comparable.

tw*ts

I've got a few points that have irked me somewhat with this piece.

Liverpool appear not to have informed the authorities of their plans to make the public show of support and the FA is likely to look unfavourably on the club’s attempts to play politics on such an emotive issue, with an FA source telling the Guardian newspaper: “We are not comfortable about this.”

Surely if the FA were on the ball, they would have known. A lot of people knew about this so surely someone could catch wind of things.

The subject has been given further resonance by the public outrage over the goal celebration enacted by Ipswich midfielder David Norris and subsequent FA disciplinary charge.

Norris mimicked being handcuffed in support of his friend, the former Plymouth Argyle goalkeeper Luke McCormick, who had recently been sentenced to seven years in prison for causing death by dangerous driving of two young brothers.

Norris was fined £5,000 and made a public apology, the money being donated to charity.

This is a completely different situation. McCormick actually carried out his crime and Norris' show of support was a complete outrage for the fact that McCormick is behind bars for a f*cking good reason. Michael Shields is not.

The FA are complete shitbags. They need to have a word with themselves if they think they're going to punish our club for doing the right thing.

You know what FA are such cu*ts its ridiculous

Typical of the FA to by-pass the real issue and blame our club when in truth they should be having a good look into how an innocent football man Michael Shields ended up in this fiasco but it seems our FA would rather agree with some of the worst courts in Europe,I wonder how they would react if one of the FA secretary's were in their and not a Liverpool fan....

F***ing arse wipes the FA are, we did it because he's not guilty you complete morons.

What do they have against Liverpool?? F***ing tw*ts they are!

Just heard on the news, the club had already spoke to the Premier League, so as Venison said, the FA can go F**k themselves.

Good luck to michael's family tomorrow and hope "Useless" Jack Straw has better news for them tomorrow.

At least the Shields family can look that pr**k Straw in the eye  knowing their son is not guilty, shame strawless couldn't do the same. What was his son arrested for again?  Ahhh, but then he got off with that cos who his dad is!!!

Also hope the Free Shields Banners will be at Blackburn on Saturday. Who does Jack support!

FA asks Liverpool to explain show of support for convicted criminal
by Daniel Taylor


The Football Association is to write to Liverpool for an explanation into the orchestrated support shown for the jailed fan Michael Shields during Monday's 0-0 draw with West Ham United at Anfield.

Officials at Soho Square are considering whether to bring disciplinary charges after taking exception at the manner in which Liverpool have publicly backed a man who has been sentenced to 10 years in prison for the attempted murder of a Bulgarian waiter, Martin Georgiev, in May 2005.

Another Liverpool fan admitted being responsible for the crime before later retracting his confession and Shields' case will go before a high court review tomorrow. The FA, however, is alarmed that Liverpool should openly use a live televised game to try to influence the matter.

Rafael Benítez's players wore T-shirts bearing the slogan Free Michael Now during their pre-match warm-up and the actress Sue Johnston was invited on to the pitch with Shields' parents to make a speech calling for the justice secretary, Jack Straw, to "do the right thing".

A mosaic was held up in the Kop spelling out Free Michael Now and the match-day programme contained an article declaring the 22-year-old's innocence. "Liverpool fan Michael Shields should be here at Anfield for tonight's game," it began. "Instead, he will be sitting in a prison cell."

The FA's concern is linked to the recent disciplinary case against the Ipswich midfielder David Norris for supporting the former Plymouth Argyle goalkeeper Luke McCormick. Norris had been charged with improper conduct after making a handcuffs gesture in dedication to McCormick, who had been sentenced to seven years in prison for causing the death by dangerous driving of two young brothers.

The FA's disciplinary department fined Norris £5,000 and is alarmed that Liverpool should also publicly back someone convicted of a serious crime and, in the process, open themselves to allegations of playing judge and jury.

The matter became a subject of controversy on radio phone-ins yesterday and the FA will, at the very least, remind Liverpool that it does not believe it is the club's role to take on such issues. "We are not comfortable about this," one source told the Guardian.

There is also an element of concern as Liverpool, according to the FA, had not informed the authorities of their plans. In 1997, their then striker Robbie Fowler was fined 2,000 Swiss francs by Uefa for revealing a T-shirt expressing his support for the city's sacked dock workers.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2008/dec/03/liverpool-michael-shields


  Now one or two things, how shitty is that by the Guardian, well as I put further up in this thread, the authorities in this case are the Premier League, so Mr Daniel Taylor, you little manc c**t, you can kiss my scouse arse.

Daniel Taylor supports Man United. His reporting here is hardly impartial. This reads to me like he's building his entire story around a phone call he himself has made to an F.A Press Officer, trying to get a reaction out of them. The only quote in inverted commas is: "We're uneasy about this."

No name. No attribution. Then he goes on to enliken our show of support to the David Norris affair, (in which the player pleaded guilty). This is a Man.U fan getting a story up out of nothing.

Liverpool should just tell the FA to go F**k themselves.

Pretty simple as that really.

Reds escape FA action We're off the hook apparently  :


Liverpool will not face any action from The Football Association will after their players wore T-shirts carrying a message of support for a fan who was jailed for the attempted murder of a Bulgarian waiter in 2005.

Liverpool players wore the T-shirts in the warm-up for match against West Ham on Monday.

Michael Shields was sentenced to 15 years in prison after being convicted of the attempted murder of Martin Georgiev in Bulgaria on a holiday taken after seeing his side win the UEFA Champions League final in Istanbul.

Liverpool's players were seen wearing 'Free Michael now' T-shirts while warming up ahead of Monday's goalless draw at Anfield.

Despite another man confessing to the attack, Shields was locked up and his sentence was reduced to 10 years on appeal. He was transferred to the UK to serve the remainder of his sentence, but his supporters have never halted their campaign to prove his innocence.

An FA spokesman said: "We have spoken to Liverpool Football Club today about this matter. We understand that Michael Shields' case is a very emotive issue and one that many Liverpool players and fans feel strongly about.

"Having heard the club's explanation we will not be taking any formal action, and we are satisfied that they understand the sensitivities around football matches being used as a platform for political messages."

"Having heard the club's explanation we will not be taking any formal action, and we are satisfied that they understand the sensitivities around football matches being used as a platform for political messages."

So did Rick say 'Sorry' or 'Do one'?

Answers on a postcard.

Did the FA really need an explanation on why everyone is supporting this ?

Bloody morons.

And one more thing, why do the media keep referring to that rat Sankey as another Liverpool fan.

HE IS NOT A RED!

He's a stinking F***ing bluenose, yet that is simply forgotten! Lazy, lazy journalism.

In fact the media, still love spouting that sh*te, that Michael was convicted. Except it was in a third-world country, were when he was arrested it was a F***ing joke, plenty of witnesses wandering past Michael chained to a F***ing RADIATOR and then through a joke of a trial.

Not only that when Bulgaria handed him over, they said this country was free to do whatever it wanted, it was no longer their concern, why has it taken the Govt and that tw*t Straw so F***ing long.

I said it before, but it's really pissing me off now, how many hours did Straw's son spend in Jail, when or if he was arrested for offering drugs to a reporter.

Just seen the FA's statement, using football matches to make political statements eh!

So the FA won't be holding anymore respect for referees campaigns, or anymore t-shirts from that Kick It Out campaign against Racism because thats political, no?

You're right mate. Lazy lazy journalism. And that Daniel Taylor is a ****

And it's lazy on the FA's part as well. What was all the fuss about if they weren't actually going to take any action - because they wouldn't have been able to take any just action anyway! It's non comparable to any other instances.

To be honest.

I'm surprised that Graham Sankey hasn't been done over.

Not that I condone that kind of thing obviously.

I've heard he's been sparked before around the Anfield area, in fact he was told to stay away.


Karma will get that fat tw*t in the end!

The Michael Shields Case
Rob Smyth and Paul Doyle
Wednesday December 3, 2008

JUSTICE FOR NORRIS

Now the Fiver is simple folk - we can't even spell M Night
Showaddywaddy, never mind understand his films - but after a wasted
life of rifling through Spot The Difference puzzle books, there is
one thing we're good at. And after hours of staring REALLY HARD at
our ZX81 screen, we've spotted the difference between the cases of
David Norris and Liverpool FC. Norris was fined £5,000 for a
gesture in support of a man convicted of causing death by dangerous
driving. Liverpool FC today went unpunished for their collective
gesture in support of a man convicted of attempted murder.

The Michael Shields case is one of the most sensitive and emotive in
this country's history, and a judicial review will begin tomorrow. We
have no idea if he is guilty or not: we're simply not in a position
to comment with even a smidgen of authority (so what's new etc). But
surely we are entering extremely uncomfortable territory if we allow
public perceptions of a miscarriage of justice to supplant that which
has been established in a court of law. A lot of people think Police
Academy 4: Citizens On Patrol is a good film; it doesn't mean it is.
(Actually it's a belter, the pick of a blisteringly funny series, but
you get the point.)

Besides, are the players really so familiar with the minutiae of the
case that they can wear such T-shirts with a clear conscience? Does
Alvaro Arbeloa, say, have a theory as to why a number of witnesses
came forward to say they saw Shields batter Martin Georgiev over the
head with a seven-pound paving slab, fracturing his skull? And given
what happened to Norris, are we to assume it's one rule for
27-year-old midfielders called David who play in East Anglia and one
rule for the rest?

"We understand that Michael Shields's case is one that many Liverpool
players and fans feel strongly about," said an FA spokesman, as the
Kenny Dalglish pin-badge he had just hidden down his pants
accidentally pierced his swingers, splashing blood all over the
journalists' buffet, not that they'd mind. "Having heard the club's
explanation we will not be taking any formal action, and we are
satisfied that they understand the sensitivities around football
matches being used as a platform for political messages." If that was
the case we wouldn't be writing this, would we?

http://football.guardian.co.uk/fiver

  They just don't get it do they!

Does
Alvaro Arbeloa, say, have a theory as to why a number of witnesses
came forward to say they saw Shields batter Martin Georgiev over the
head with a seven-pound paving slab, fracturing his skull?

I said it before, with Mr Taylor's piece but seen as this one goes a bit further I'll say it again, most of those witnesses had to walk past Michael chained to a radiator in that Bulgarian police station, what do you think those witnesses were gonna do, put two and two together, come up with five and assume the blonde haired lad sitting there must of did it! It F***ing stinks what the Guardian have done today - anything about those four mancs locked up in Rome being Hooligans then!

But the Guardian is part of the same news group as the Manchester Evening News, isn't it!

to be honest, i thought that something like this would happen when i saw it. also, to throw a bit of a spanner in the works. he is guilty!, he has been found guilty in court... ok, he may not have commited the crime, but he has been found guilty, personally i couldn't support something like this. yes i think its wrong for an innocent man to be in jail. its a difficult topic and i think liverpool should have stayed out.

Really, The Birmingham Six and Guildford Four were found guilty in a Court of Law.

Except they weren't guilty!!

 Just heard on Radio Merseyside that the F.A. have accepted the clubs version of why they supported Michael and will not take action against the club.Could this be a good omen for Michaels appeal.

F***ing does my head in that this attention for a very sensitive issue is only brought about because its against us. How quick they are to highlight that it was a Liverpool fan, lighting up the headline 'Liverpool support convicted criminal'. Absolute F***ing bunch of F***ing cu*ts the lot of them.

As for the FA, do they seriously not F***ing know who Michael Shields is? They want an explanation from our club to tell them why they did it when they know why we did it. Rafa to come out and tell everyone involved in this smear campaign to F**k off back to where they came from and develop a sense of empathy and F***ing common sense.

People should be able to show their support for people especially when they are innocent.

It's a joke just thinkin about how the F.A have the nerve to get involved. They seem to want to get involved in everything.